“I have something like €3,000 a month,” Malta’s special envoy to China told the Times of Malta last week.

As Sai Mizzi Liang did so, she broke down in tears. It appears this was not the only breakdown in this communication.

At best she was being economical with the truth, at worst she was lying. Either way we did not get the full truth.

When her employment contract was finally released by the government on Monday night, a different story emerged.

It shows that she actually earns, in terms of salary, €74,000 a year. That’s significantly more than what Ms Mizzi Liang ‘disclosed’.

When asked about their salary nobody talks in terms of net income and, even if they did, hers is closer to €4,000 per month.

But even that only tells half the story. She has a range of benefits over and above this income including a representation allowance of €3,200, child allowance, a fully expensed residence, official’s car, as well as allowances related to health and education.

The Opposition has claimed that this amounts to a massive €13,000 a month.

The government has for months ducked and dived on this issue, completely casting aside the transparency it had promised before it was elected last year.

It repeatedly ignored requests to publish Ms Mizzi Liang’s contract until it was practically forced to do so on Monday night.

It is completely unacceptable for anyone to be paid by the taxpayer and for the taxpayer not to be told how much he is forking out for the privilege.

Faced with mounting pressure, Joseph Muscat told The Sunday Times of Malta three days ago that the issue could have been handled better. That is a huge understatement.

One, it was unwise from the start to appoint a minister’s wife to such a role, for it smacks of nepotism and convenience. And it is simply not good enough for Konrad Mizzi to brush aside questions about this by saying that her employment does not fall under his ministry.

Nobody is fooled by such semantics and Dr Muscat would have been the first to go on the attack had such a thing happened under the former administration.

Two, the Prime Minister’s comparison of her package with that of Malta’s former EU ambassador is odious.

She has nowhere near the same experience and is he really saying that the level of responsibility and involvement is as intense in China as it is in the EU? And, in any case, hadn’t his party been critical of such a package when they were in Opposition?

A recurring theme for this government has been to justify what it would previously have tagged as unjustifiable by making reference to a practice that took place before it was elected.

The Prime Minister seems to be getting away with this while he is still riding the wave of his huge electoral victory, but there will come a time – it is difficult to say when – when his contradictory statements will begin to eat away at his credibility.

This government, and the people that represent it whether they are ministers’ wives or not, must also learn the ‘art’ of telling the truth when asked legitimate questions relating to their public role – if for no other reason than to prove that they can at least get their figures right when they are dealing with our money.